Jump to content

BankerGirl

Members
  • Posts

    470
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17
  • Country

    United States

Posts posted by BankerGirl

  1. 1 hour ago, Neil Blumberg said:

    I think most blood bank reagents and tests have been grandparented in.  The FDA knows there is no alternative to these home brew reagents and testing procdures.

    I attended a webinar presentation on this and the presenter stated specifically that NOTHING has been grandfathered.  There are some items that the FDA has said it would still use enforcement discretion, but was very much above my understanding.

     

  2. 1 hour ago, Bet'naSBB said:

    We use our CAP samples AFTER the results have been submitted and results have been received from CAP.

    We just finished assigning a BUNCH of "Internal Assessments" and "Method Comparisons" using our first batch of CAPs that we'd already received our results for.  All these count as "blinds" for the staff.  Instead of making 1 tech do the whole survey, we give each assignee one sample to do and then compare their results with those expected by CAP.  works great!

    For FMH, we get two CAP "TMCAF" surveys per year.  1/2 the staff does the first and the other 1/2 the second so everyone gets a blind for FMH.

    We do the same.  In the past I tried to doctor samples for ABIDs, and they were either non-reactive or 4+ at immediate spin.

  3. On 1/15/2024 at 8:25 AM, REN_NH said:

    Resurrecting this thread to ask what document control systems are being used out there?  I would love to scan in many items to store electronically (i.e. temperature charts, etc.). Are people scanning to a facilities specific drive or something else?    We use MediaLab for policies and competency assessments.

    We use MediaLab also and scan the package inserts in a job aids.  You can revise them the same as you can your policies.

  4. We have had HFAP until they were purchased by ACHC, and both of those have cited me for the lack of correlations:  one for not performing them at all, although I pointed out that we do that on every specimen without previous records, and just last year because I didn't include crossmatch tests with my Type and Screen correlations.  I contested the citation again, stating that it was the exact same methodology as the antibody screen, but was unsuccessful as their standards say "the same test using different methodologies ".  I gave up and added XM as well.  No concept of what we do and no common sense! :wacko:

  5. 1 hour ago, jayinsat said:

    I am not sure I understand your question. 

    If the mother had an admission type and screen and was rh negative, then all that would be required post-delivery is the fetal bleed screen. Why would you want to repeat and antibody screen post delivery?

    We do the same as Jayinsat.

  6. We are in the process of remodeling our Lab to accommodate an automation line and need to replace our decades-old lab benches and storage.  Has anyone done this recently that can give me recommendations on suppliers?  I should mention that we are in the US.

  7. On 3/7/2023 at 5:41 PM, Ensis01 said:

    While I understand the convenience of making MTPs and emergency release a paperless process. I regard the physical signature a good reminder that issuing uncrossmatched blood must not be taken lightly. 

    We scan the form to the EMR and the physician signs it electronically.  We recently had a physician who refused to sign the uncrossmatched form when the patient first started hemorrhaging but then called an MTP.  Of course, the MTP was discontinued a few minutes later and he sent back everything except 4 RCs and a platelet.  No idea what he was thinking, but he did sign the form.   <_< 

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.